Flashback: Obama pledged to reduce health insurance premiums by $2,500 per family per year

That was then. This is now:

1. The insurance plan I wrote about here washingtonpost.com/blogs/wonkblog… which rejects or upcharges 25% of applicants, is hardly the worst.— Ezra Klein (@ezraklein) June 02, 2013

4. And many sick folks have long ago given up trying. These rates might understate the real amount of rejection.— Ezra Klein (@ezraklein) June 02, 2013

5. You really can't look at the teaser rates for indiv market plans and say that's the "price."— Ezra Klein (@ezraklein) June 02, 2013

6. The people worried about "rate shock" now haven't been as worried about the shock for these folks who get turned away.— Ezra Klein (@ezraklein) June 02, 2013

7. Nor is there even a serious alternative policy for helping them that's being seriously pursued on the right.— Ezra Klein (@ezraklein) June 02, 2013

8. The individual market is a nightmare. Folks using measures that implicitly endorse the status quo need to rethink.— Ezra Klein (@ezraklein) June 02, 2013

And there’s this:

@avik Remember, Obama's plan didn't have an individual mandate. That was Hillary's. And what passed is pretty much the Senate Finance Plan.— Policy Prescriptions (@PolicyRx) June 02, 2013

Fair enough. The bottom line, though, is that rates are going higher — significantly higher — for many people (particularly affluent, healthy people) in the individual market. Yes, believe it or not, New York Times columnist Paul Krugman got it wrong. (Not the first time. Won’t be the last.)

Glad we're finally having a debate about whether rate shock is a good thing. But that's a different debate than whether or not it exists.— Avik Roy (@avik) June 01, 2013


What Next?

Related Articles